lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CANn89iJzsUbLXB_M5UZr2ieNyQdGHsKPFzqeQFGtKtL8d9pu0Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 10:20:19 -0700 From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, syzbot <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>, Petar Penkov <ppenkov@...gle.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] flow_dissector: disable preemption around BPF calls On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:17 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:38:55AM -0700, 'Eric Dumazet' via syzkaller wrote: > > Various things in eBPF really require us to disable preemption > > before running an eBPF program. > > Is that true for all eBPF uses? I note that we don't disable preemption > in the lib/test_bpf.c module, for example. > > If it's a general requirement, perhaps it's worth an assertion within > BPF_PROG_RUN()? The assertion is already there :) This is how syzbot triggered the report.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists